Jitendra Bahadur Singh vs State Of U.P.
2012 Latest Caselaw 1804 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 12
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 266 of 2002
 

 
Petitioner :- Jitendra Bahadur Singh
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
 
Petitioner Counsel :- A.K.Verma
 
Respondent Counsel :- Govt.Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Ravindra Singh,J.

List is revised.

None appears to press this revision.

Heard learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

From the perusal of the record it appears that in the present case the revisionist has been convicted by learned Special A.C.J.M. (CBI), Lucknow in case No. 644 of 2001. The revisionist has been convicted under section 420 IPC and sentence three years S.I. with a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default of payment of fine the revisionist shall undergo the additional sentence of two months SI and he has been convicted under section 468 IPC for four years S.I. with a fine of Rs. 3,000/-, in default of payment of fine he shall undergo the additional S.I. of three months and he has been again convicted under section 471 IPC and sentence four years S.I. with a fine of Rs. 3,000/-, in default of payment of fine he shall further undergo S.I. of three months. The order dated 18.8.2001 was challenged by the revisionist by way of filing the criminal Appeal No. 55 of 2001, the same has been dismissed with the term of reducing the sentence on 21.5.2002.

Trial court has recorded the findings of the conviction after scrutinizing the evidence. In support of the prosecution version six witnesses have been examined and from the side of the defence two persons have been examined as defence witness. The appellate court has again considered the testimoney of the witnesses and after considering the testimony of the defence, finding of the conviction has been recorded by the appellate court  and confirmed the sentence awarded by the trial court. There is no scope of re-appreciation and there is no illegality in the impugned orders passed by learned trial court as well as the appellate court. There is no good ground to interfere in the impugned judgement and order dated 21.5.2002 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Lucknow in criminal appeal No. 55 of 2001. The criminal revision is devoid of merit. The revisionist is on bail, his bail is cancelled, he is directed to appear before the court concerned to serve out the sentence as awarded by the appellate court on 21.5.2002. In case he does not appear before the court concerned within three months from today, the court concerned shall issue the warrant of arrest  and take him on custody and he shall be sent to jail to serve out the sentence.

Accordingly this revision is dismissed.

Order Date :- 16.5.2012/RPD